If that makes you feel betteryou dont know what you are talking about chap.
If that makes you feel betteryou dont know what you are talking about chap.
Of course definitions can be changed and interpreted differentlySome may say that the definition of a person can be changed. To avoid this tactic, in the OP, the zygote is a "What ever word that means a human being regarded as an individual who has legal rights, such as the right to not be murdered".
(Please stop the tactics and just answer the OP. If you can't control yourself in not using these tactics, please don't reply)
Word games. It is their style of bickerfest.The zygote is 2 gamates, the sperm and the egg from the father and mother. Its new life and a new human being.
Not sure what you are twittering on about?
An egg is a single living cell. Do you disagree? If not, then that is one living cell. A sperm is a single living cell. Do you disagree? If not, then that is a second living cell. The process starts with two different living cells. Two. Two living cells necessarily exist before the process starts.The zygote is 2 gamates (sic), the sperm and the egg from the father and mother. Its new life and a new human being.
Not sure what you are twittering on about?
What sort of proof is needed to show that life begins at fertilization and that the zygote is a person?If it was proven that life begins at fertilization and that the zygote is a person, would you be okay with aborting it?
(Please don't reply if you don't answer hypothetical questions.)
My answer remans, no. Neither of the two parts of your hypothetical make any sense, so in a hypothetical universe where they do make sense, then I would not support abortion.Some may say that the definition of a person can be changed. To avoid this tactic, in the OP, the zygote is a "What ever word that means a human being regarded as an individual who has legal rights, such as the right to not be murdered".
(Please stop the tactics and just answer the OP. If you can't control yourself in not using these tactics, please don't reply)
When asked about when life begins, a colleague said 4 billion years ago.An egg is a single living cell. Do you disagree? If not, then that is one living cell. A sperm is a single living cell. Do you disagree? If not, then that is a second living cell. The process starts with two different living cells. Two. Two living cells necessarily exist before the process starts.
We are not discussing new life, we are discussing different life, with different DNA. The process requires living cells as the input.
That's just life on earth.When asked about when life begins, a colleague said 4 billion years ago.
I can feel better but you still dont know what you are talking aboutIf that makes you feel better
The new human being doesnt start developing unless the egg.and sperm join and are fertilized. We can see the human being develop from thatAn egg is a single living cell. Do you disagree? If not, then that is one living cell. A sperm is a single living cell. Do you disagree? If not, then that is a second living cell. The process starts with two different living cells. Two. Two living cells necessarily exist before the process starts.
We are not discussing new life, we are discussing different life, with different DNA. The process requires living cells as the input.
That's just life on earth.
That certainly can happen, but not always.The new human being doesnt start developing unless the egg.and sperm join and are fertilized. We can see the human being develop from that
So I what I said was correct. One cant see the human being develop from a sperm. Right?That certainly can happen, but not always.
The difficulty of verifying live beyond earth is certainly great. However, that makes no difference to my point. Neither does it have any bearing on atheism, which concerns the absence of gods, not the presence of extra terrestrial life.The dearth of life beyond earth seems to be a persistent problem for your atheist view. If you wait long enough you might be proven correct, ya never know.
The word "life" covers a lot more than just human life. A wombat is alive and is not a human being. An egg cell is alive and is not a human being. A sperm cell is alive and is not a human being. You are narrowing the scope of the OP unnecessarily.The new human being doesnt start developing unless the egg.and sperm join and are fertilized. We can see the human being develop from that
You are denying observable reality with a load of waffle.The word "life" covers a lot more than just human life. A wombat is alive and is not a human being. An egg cell is alive and is not a human being. A sperm cell is alive and is not a human being. You are narrowing the scope of the OP unnecessarily.
Thanks Princess.Hello. I don't believe in abortion now, regardless of what they can or cannot prove. The fact that man doesn't know everything is enough proof to make me give me the benefit of the doubt and to choose not to harm an unborn baby. If someone handed you a box and told you there may or may not be a baby in there and told you to shoot it, I think most people would rather err on the side of caution and not shoot the box just in case a baby IS in there. That's how people should view a pregnancy. There's no proof the unborn baby is NOT a living soul at conception, so err on the side of caution.
The difficulty of verifying live beyond earth is certainly great.
Hello. I don't believe in abortion now, regardless of what they can or cannot prove. The fact that man doesn't know everything is enough proof to make me give me the benefit of the doubt and to choose not to harm an unborn baby. If someone handed you a box and told you there may or may not be a baby in there and told you to shoot it, I think most people would rather err on the side of caution and not shoot the box just in case a baby IS in there. That's how people should view a pregnancy. There's no proof the unborn baby is NOT a living soul at conception, so err on the side of caution.